51–60 of 61 posts
The original problem is that farms are blocking elephant migration paths. "The elephants’ key migratory routes have been cut off in many places." And now you've replaced a fence that they can break through with a fence made of bees. Yes, this is probably good for the humans, but I don't see how it's better for the elephants.
Well, now they don't get shot, presumably.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He said "not for the sake of getting rich". This indicates he's okay with her being rich, but he hopes she becomes rich for the sake of helping with an innovative idea rather than pure profit-mongering.
The phrase "profit-mongering" also shows that you demonize wealth unless you agree with the recipient's intentions. Markets should be designed to reward people who produce and serve others well. When a market rewards someone or a group of people for producing and serving well, it should not be demonized. If what they are producing or serving is counter to the good of society then society must adapt laws and regulatio…
Society adopting laws and regulations depends on there being a respectable society to being with. Laws will only get you as far as their enforcement. It's incredibly easy to take advantage of a poorer person than yourself just because you have the upper hand. I'm not talking the difference between bee farms and soft drinks, I'm talking the difference between helping farmers set up these fences themselves and forcing farmers to set these up while demanding half their profits forever in return. But you completely understand that, don't you?
The phrase "because it makes" shows that you are going to stop being pointless unless you have a valid argument to bring to the table. To quote The Big Lebowski: You're not wrong, you're just an asshole.
The original problem is that farms are blocking elephant migration paths. "The elephants’ key migratory routes have been cut off in many places." And now you've replaced a fence that they can break through with a fence made of bees. Yes, this is probably good for the humans, but I don't see how it's better for the elephants.
And few people would be verynpleased with an elephant going through their crops.
I have to wonder, why are these kind of solutions driven by outside players instead of local communities? Is there some kind of informational advantage the locals don't have? Elephants scares bees seems so simple that I'm not sure why locals weren't already doing it.
For many locals, just shooting the elephants would be the solution. Outsiders care about the elephants and the humans (most of the times, in that order).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Free honey? Beekeeping is actually a lot of work True, but you can decide your tradeoff: if you don't want or need much honey, don't gather it. The bees will be healtier as well, as a result.
Am I the only one to whom consecutive replies like this sound like one's own thinking process?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Free honey? Beekeeping is actually a lot of work (especially when the hives are spread out like this). Also they say it's up to 85% effective, so that's the maximum not the average.
> Free honey? Beekeeping is actually a lot of work True, but you can decide your tradeoff: if you don't want or need much honey, don't gather it. The bees will be healtier as well, as a result.
it all makes it sound like taking care of 200 hives per Km is an effortless task.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Free honey? Beekeeping is actually a lot of work True, but you can decide your tradeoff: if you don't want or need much honey, don't gather it. The bees will be healtier as well, as a result.
I'm not sure about the rest of the world but honey prices in New Zealand are skyrocketing - this may be due in part to Manuka honey being a particularly valuable honey. It might be hard work, but the returns would appear to be at levels so high that give theft is in the papers regularly now.
That's more than likely, and there's probably an international manuka craze on top of it: my (euro) grocery has a bunch of the usual blended "flower honey" and manuka, and that's it. Manuka is the first monofloral honey I've found outside of specialized or semi-specialized shops[0] (which is a shame).
[0] well not exactly, (false) Acacia is a fairly common one as well due to its physical characteristics: it's very clear and stays liquid for a very long time so it's an easy sell. But it's even blander and nondescript than blended
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure about the rest of the world but honey prices in New Zealand are skyrocketing - this may be due in part to Manuka honey being a particularly valuable honey. It might be hard work, but the returns would appear to be at levels so high that give theft is in the papers regularly now.
> this may be due in part to Manuka honey being a particularly valuable honey. That's more than likely, and there's probably an international manuka craze on top of it: my (euro) grocery has a bunch of the usual blended "flower honey" and manuka, and that's it. Manuka is the first monofloral honey I've found outside of specialized or semi-specialized shops[0] (which is a shame). [0] well not exactly, (false) Acacia i…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> this may be due in part to Manuka honey being a particularly valuable honey. That's more than likely, and there's probably an international manuka craze on top of it: my (euro) grocery has a bunch of the usual blended "flower honey" and manuka, and that's it. Manuka is the first monofloral honey I've found outside of specialized or semi-specialized shops[0] (which is a shame). [0] well not exactly, (false) Acacia i…
Manuka has good characteristics and is a reasonable antibacterial. It seems to be possible to fake Manuka content with Eucalyptus, which is a shame however. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mānuka_honey